| Literature DB >> 22957135 |
Jakob Ryd Ottosson1, Per-Åke Jarnheimer, Thor Axel Stenström, Björn Olsen.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective with this study was to determine and follow antimicrobial resistance in faecal bacteria over time in hospital wastewater pipe sediment. A further aim was to determine bacterial growth rates of sensitive, intermediate and resistant intestinal enterococci in different ciprofloxacin concentrations as a measure of bacterial fitness.Entities:
Keywords: antimicrobial resistance; coliform bacteria; enterococci; hospital wastewater; sediments
Year: 2012 PMID: 22957135 PMCID: PMC3426344 DOI: 10.3402/iee.v2i0.7438
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Ecol Epidemiol ISSN: 2000-8686
Fig. 1Sampling arrangement in a sewage line at Kalmar county hospital. The sampling equipment was installed in a manhole. Wastewater was pumped from a sump placed with the bottom lower than the main furrow in the manhole to ensure the continuous presence of water in the sump. In the tank, settled particles were collected in tubes.
Breakpoints for sensitive (S), intermediate (I) and resistant (R) categorisation by the paper disc method and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) breakpoints for resistance categorisation by the spread plate method
| Zone diameter breakpoints (mm) | MIC breakpoints (mg l−1 agar) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antimicrobial | Paper disc concentration (µg) | Coliforms | Enterococci | Coliforms | Enterococci |
| Ampicillin | 10 | – | 20/16 | – | 8 |
| Imipenem | 10 | 23/16 | 20/16 | 8 | 8 |
| Vancomycin | 5 | – | 11/9 | – | 4 |
| Ciprofloxacin | 5 | 24/17 | 32/12 | 1 | 2 |
| Trimetroprim–Sulphamethoxasol | 25 | 17/13 | – | 32 | – |
Zone breakpoints 23/16, i.e. clear zone with a diameter: S≥23 mm, R≤16 mm and 168 mg l−1 (18).
Resistant coliform bacterial isolates (/total isolates) by the disc diffusion method on PDM agar and percentage resistant coliform bacteria as determined by the ratio CFU ml−1 on LES endoagar with and without antimicrobials (%) in concentrations corresponding to Table 1
| Ciprofloxacin | Imipenem | Trimetroprim–Sulphamethoxazole | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antimicrobial Medium | PDM | LES | PDM | LES | PDM | LES |
|
| ||||||
| 13 December 2000 | 0/44 | 1.4 | 0/44 | <0.1 | 0/44 | 0.7 |
| 15 February 2001 | 2/43 | <0.1 | 1/43 | <0.1 | 0/43 | 0.2 |
| 17 April 2001 | 0/58 | 1.1 | 3/58 | <0.1 | 0/58 | 3.4 |
| 07 June 2001 | 0/16 | ND | 0/16 | ND | 0/16 | ND |
| 30 August 2001 | 0/46 | ND | 0/46 | ND | 0/46 | ND |
| 24 October 2001 | 0/34 | <0.1 | 1/29 | <0.1 | 1/29 | 5.4 |
| 24 January 2002 | 1/37 | <0.1 | 1/37 | 0.1 | 5/37 | 3.8 |
| 3/273 | 6/273 | 6/273 | ||||
Resistant intestinal enterococci isolates (/total isolates) by the disc diffusion method on PDM agar and percentage resistant enterococci as determined by the ratio CFU ml−1 on ES agar with and without antimicrobials (%) in concentrations corresponding to Table 1
| Ciprofloxacin | Imipenem | Ampicillin | Vancomycin | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Antimicrobial Medium | PDM | ES | PDM | ES | PDM | ES | PDM | ES |
|
| ||||||||
| 13 December 2000 | 2/12 | 0.2 | 2/12 | 0.2 | 2/12 | 0.1 | 2/12 | <0.1 |
| 15 February 2001 | 0/24 | 3.5[ | 0/24 | <0.1 | 0/24 | <0.1 | 0/24 | <0.1 |
| 17 April 2001 | 2/24 | 4.0[ | 0/24 | 1.0 | 1/24 | <0.1 | 0/24 | <0.1 |
| 07 June 2001 | 0/20 | ND | 0/20 | ND | 0/20 | ND | 0/20 | ND |
| 30 August 2001 | 9/24[ | ND | 0/24 | ND | 0/20 | ND | 0/20 | ND |
| 24 October 2001 | 8/30[ | 0.4 | 0/30 | 0.3 | 0/30 | <0.1 | 0/30 | <0.1 |
| 24 January 2002 | 0/24 | <0.1 | 0/24 | <0.1 | 0/24 | <0.1 | 0/24 | <0.1 |
|
| ||||||||
| 21/158 | 2/158 | 3/158 | 0/158 | |||||
a(P<0.05).
Fig. 2Dendrogram from PhP-typing of ciprofloxacin-resistant faecal enterococci at sample dates.
Generation and lag-phase times (±standard deviation) (min) for nine independent intestinal enterococci isolates from three CIP resistance classes in different ciprofloxacin concentrations (µg l−1)
| 0 (µg l−1) | 100 (µg l−1) | 500 (µg l−1) | 1000 (µg l−1) | 4000 (µg l−1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CIP resistance class | Generation time (min) | Lag-phase time (min) | Generation time (min) | Lag-phase time (min) | Generation time (min) | Lag-phase time (min) | Generation time (min) | Lag-phase time (min) | Generation time (min) | Lag-phase time (min) |
| Resistant | 39.8±0.2 | 127±12 | 39.8±0.1 | 127±12 | 40.2±0.4[ | 130±17 | 46.6±3.9[ | 138±19 | 52.8±6.6 | 150±17 |
| Intermediate | 40.4±11 | 133±21 | 40.4±0.1 | 133±21 | 43.9±0.3[ | 133±7.6 | 109±18 | 120±20 | – | – |
| Sensitive | 40.4±11 | 97±6[ | 42.1±14 | 97±6[ | 61.2±9.6 | 90±10[ | 175±21 | 90±10[ | – | – |
aStatistically shorter time (P<0.05).
a’Statistically shorter time than the longer of the other two (P<0.05).
bStatistically shorter time (P<0.01).
b'Statistically shorter time than the longer of the other two (P<0.01).
c’Statistically shorter time than the longer of the other two (P<0.001).